Australian Open 2013: Andy Murray must find way past the ageless maestro Roger Federer

On the eve of this tournament, Roger Federer described 2013 as a “transition
year” for him. A year, in other words, when he takes another step towards
the slippers and cocoa. A year when he cuts back on his commitments to ease
the strain on his ageing body. Well, so much for that theory.

Powering through: Andy Murray raced into the semi-finals with a straight-forward and straight-sets win over Jeremy ChardyPhoto: GETTY IMAGES

In Melbourne yesterday, Federer sliced and smashed and carved the ball with all his old elan. He could not quite polish off Jo-Wilfried Tsonga as quickly as he would have liked, but he kept the punches flying until this Muhammad Ali lookalike lay flat on the canvas. And tomorrow it will be a charged-up, inspired Federer who stands between Andy Murray and a third successive grand slam final.

All the talk has been of the emerging Murray-Djokovic rivalry and how it has replaced Federer-Nadal as the biggest show in town. Yet Federer-Murray has also been pretty tasty of late. In 2012, they contested two finals on the lawns of Wimbledon in the space of four weeks – a claim that no other two players in tennis history can match.

Murray might lead the overall head-to-head score by 10 wins to nine, but there is a glaring omission here. He has beaten Federer in America, in Asia, and in London. He has beaten Federer on grass courts, on hard courts, and on indoor courts. But the one thing he has never done is beat him in a grand slam. The slams are Federer’s manor. These are the four stages where he has delivered the defining performances of his life, where he has tested his own limits like an actor playing Hamlet, and discovered that they extend further than anyone – even he – had guessed.

He has toyed with the vast majority of opponents, treated a few with the utmost seriousness, and lost to only a few of his current rivals: most obviously Djokovic and Rafael Nadal, but also Tsonga, Tomas Berdych and Juan Martin del Potro.

Can Murray join this elite club? Tomorrow’s match will be different from its predecessors in several ways. For one, it is their first grand slam meeting that is not also a final. For two, Murray has already joined another elite club by lifting the US Open title last September. And for three, he is no longer trying to beat Federer by standing deep and counter-punching.

These days, he pursues a similar blueprint to the one his coach Ivan Lendl used to employ against John McEnroe: he hustles, he harries, he takes away Federer’s angles and his time. He does not look for too many instant winners, because a straight shoot-out is more Federer’s game than his, but he tries to keep the great man scuttling hither and yon. The Federer forehand, he knows, is one of the most destructive shots the game has seen, but it is also a shot that can self-destruct under pressure.

“I have always enjoyed the match-ups with Andy because it gets to be very tactical,” Federer said yesterday. “It was never a straightforward match. He would make you doubt and play very different to the rest of the guys. I always enjoyed that, when it’s not just as if every point’s the same. We used to mix it up a lot against each other.

“Now it’s changed a bit because he’s playing more offensive. The rallies aren’t as long and gruelling as they used to be. We both can do that. But recently he has proved that he can be offensive when it presents itself. I think it’s especially on the service return that you see the biggest significant change in his game.”

These are all parts of the Lendl master plan. His greatest achievement has been to persuade Murray to gamble more, to accept that the odd unforced error is the price of a more assertive game. And that it is a price very much worth paying.

“That’s more of a mindset thing that Ivan has spoken to me about before a lot of the big matches this year,” Murray said in September. “If you’re going to lose, go down swinging. Don’t go with your ass against the back fence, chasing down every ball. Getting me to make that happen in a match is what I credit him with.”

In this tournament, Murray has put the theory into practice. He made the smoothest progress through to the semi-finals of any of the top four seeds – even if the early departures of Juan Martin del Potro and Marin Cilic did make life easier for him. To this point, Murray has spent only 8hr 55min on court, as opposed to Federer’s 10hr 47min and 13hr 6min for Djokovic. He also has a perfect tally of 15 sets won, zero lost – something he has never previously managed at this stage of a grand slam.

Jeremy Chardy was the latest man to go under the wheels of the Murray chariot yesterday, when he was summarily dismissed by a 6-4, 6-1, 6-3 scoreline. Clocking the fact that the Frenchman lacked an effective backhand return, Murray kept scoring cheap points by belting serves down that wing. And then, when Chardy moved across to cover the primary line of attack. Murray would ace him into the open court he had left behind.

Asked yesterday if he was worried about the lack of stiff competition on his path to the last four – which contrasted with Federer’s much tougher draw – Murray was philosophical last night. “I can’t be disappointed about being in the semis of a slam without dropping a set. That would be silly. I think you have to trust yourself that when you are tested you’re going to play better tennis.”

The other factor that has concerned Murray’s camp is the lack of any evening matches on his programme to date. To accustom himself to the feeling of playing under lights, he went out on court for a second time last night for a practice hit, although he had to make do with the second-string Hisense Arena. The plan is to do the same thing again today.

Ultimately, these details are unlikely to be decisive. True, Murray has not accustomed himself to Rod Laver Arena in the dark. True, Federer played for 3½ hours in his 7-6, 4-6, 7-6, 3-6, 6-3 victory over Tsonga yesterday. But these are two of sport’s greatest professionals. They can cope with just about anything that is thrown at them - including, in Federer’s case, the passage of time. All that remains to be seen is how they cope with each other.